Performer 5+2 (Performer 7)vs.Project Meta
Sound & Specs Comparison
Information
Both IEMs are widely regarded in the audiophile community. See how they differ in terms of sub-bass response, upper mids, clarity, and overall tonality. Spider charts and rating breakdowns included.
Objective Comparison
Facts, details, stuff.
| General Info | Performer 5+2 (Performer 7) | Project Meta |
|---|---|---|
| Brand | AFUL | CrinEar |
| Country | Taiwan | – |
| IEM Description | AFUL Performer 5+2 (Performer 7) delivers a dynamic and engaging listening experience with deep, controlled bass, clear mids, and airy treble. Its tuning strikes a balance between technical precision and musical enjoyment, making it a versatile choice for a wide range of genres. Crafted with precision acoustic design and a modern, ergonomic shell, it offers both comfort and performance in a sleek package. | A debut IEM by Crinacle's CrinEar: a compact, full-aluminum flagship tuned to a “tilted Diffuse Field + bass boost” curve. Delivers vibrant mids, warm sub-bass, and clear treble—crafted for musical accuracy and comfort. |
| Price Level | 100 – 500 | 100 – 500 |
| Housing & Driver | ||
|---|---|---|
| Driver Config | Tribrid | – |
| Driver Types | Micro Planar Tweeter + Dynamic Driver + Balanced Armature | – |
| Shell Material | – | – |
| Cable | – | – |
| Technical | ||
|---|---|---|
| Freq Range | – | – |
| Impedance (Ω) | – | – |
| Sensitivity (dB) | – | – |
| Crossover | – | – |
| Platform Info | ||
|---|---|---|
| Comments | 1 | 0 |
| Visit Count | 264 | 96 |
| External Reviews | 1 | 1 |
Meta Ratings
Performer 5+2 (Performer 7) delivers slightly better sound reproduction, offering a more immersive and engaging experience overall. Its tonal balance, clarity, and spatial imaging stand out clearly compared to Project Meta (7.9 vs 7). For comfort fit, Performer 5+2 (Performer 7) performs markedly better (8.1 vs 6.5). The tactile feel and solidity of Performer 5+2 (Performer 7) suggest markedly greater robustness and longevity compared to the more fragile impression left by Project Meta. The included cable with Performer 5+2 (Performer 7) shows clearly better strain relief and physical resilience. Compared to Project Meta, the overall accessory offering from Performer 5+2 (Performer 7) is readably more aligned with the expectations of discerning audiophiles.
| Performer 5+2 (Performer 7) | Project Meta | |
|---|---|---|
| Sound | 8.2 | 7.0 |
| Comfort Fit | 7.9 | 6.5 |
| Build Quality | 8.3 | 6.5 |
| Stock Cable | 7.4 | 6.5 |
| Accessories | 7.2 | 6.0 |
Sound Characteristics
Low-frequency extension on Project Meta feels a more natural and authoritative, while Performer 5+2 (Performer 7) lacks some reach (6 vs 5.5). Listeners may find the low-end impact on Performer 5+2 (Performer 7) a more engaging during high-dynamic passages (7 vs 6.5). The lower midrange on Performer 5+2 (Performer 7) blends s more smoothly into the bass region, avoiding the disconnect found in Project Meta (7.3 vs 6.5). Performer 5+2 (Performer 7) strikes a a better balance between presence and smoothness in the upper mids compared to Project Meta (7.7 vs 5.5). Project Meta offers b greater shimmer and nuance in the lower treble, revealing micro-details that Performer 5+2 (Performer 7) misses (7.5 vs 7). Performer 5+2 (Performer 7) captures ambient cues and reverbs e more precisely through its upper treble, enhancing spatial perception over Project Meta (7.7 vs 6.5). Listeners may notice that Performer 5+2 (Performer 7) presents sounds with a more lateral space, giving recordings more openness than Project Meta (7.5 vs 6). The retrieval of faint audio cues on Performer 5+2 (Performer 7) is a more convincing, while Project Meta tends to gloss over them (7.7 vs 6). Performer 5+2 (Performer 7) organizes musical elements a better across depth, enhancing spatial realism over Project Meta (7.8 vs 6.5). Performer 5+2 (Performer 7) shows d better control of masking effects, maintaining clarity across frequency ranges better than Project Meta (7.8 vs 5.5). Notes played through Performer 5+2 (Performer 7) feel a weightier and fuller, giving a more satisfying impact than those from Project Meta (6.8 vs 6). Performer 5+2 (Performer 7) delivers dynamic shifts with s greater impact, making Project Meta sound comparatively tame (6.5 vs 6). Project Meta controls harsh sibilant peaks n more effectively, making vocals smoother than on Performer 5+2 (Performer 7) (6.5 vs 5.5). Performer 5+2 (Performer 7) presents instrument timbre with a more natural coloration, giving a realistic tone that Project Meta lacks (7 vs 6). The overall tonality of Performer 5+2 (Performer 7) is m more balanced and cohesive, offering a sound signature that feels better tuned than Project Meta (7.7 vs 6). Subtle ridges and granularity are conveyed a more clearly on Performer 5+2 (Performer 7), adding life that Project Meta doesn’t quite match (6.8 vs 5.5).
| Performer 5+2 (Performer 7) | Project Meta | |
|---|---|---|
| Sub Bass | 5.8 | 6.0 |
| Bass | 6.7 | 6.0 |
| Bass Feel | 7.0 | 6.5 |
| Lower Mids | 7.3 | 6.5 |
| Upper Mids | 7.5 | 5.5 |
| Lower Treble | 6.4 | 7.5 |
| Upper Treble | 7.8 | 6.5 |
| Sound Stage Width | 7.0 | 6.0 |
| Detail | 7.8 | 6.0 |
| Layering | 7.8 | 6.5 |
| Masking | 7.8 | 5.5 |
| Note Weight | 6.8 | 6.0 |
| Slam | 6.5 | 6.0 |
| Sibilance | 5.5 | 6.5 |
| Timbre Color | 7.0 | 6.0 |
| Tonality | 7.7 | 6.0 |
| Texture | 6.8 | 5.5 |
Tonal Signature
// Nothing to compare yet.